Board index FlightGear Support 3rd Party Repositories

Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:00 pm

Oh!?

Try this:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/FGMEMBERS/bf109/master/bf109g-set.xml

That's an xml file. It should also download

and this:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/FGMEMBERS/bf109/master/Nasal/bf109.nas

That's a nasal. It should also download

If neither, let me know, and I will contact them again.

Best,
IHCOL
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:06 pm

@lester
Note above that for getting a downloadable version of a single file on github, I used the 'raw' content style
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby LesterBoffo » Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:58 pm

Well yeah, I figured that out after poking around on the FGMembers/fgdata/nasal page for two hours.

Still, it's a major PITA compared to what was working prior to the change. Do you want me to post *print-screens of the lack of 'download' buttons for the .xml's, .nas, etc.... and such, side by side with the list of files I was happily accessing with a 'download' button from a week and a half ago?

Going on the comments from GoogleCode Blogspot's reactions to GoogleCode closing in January, 2016, ( guess where FG keeps it's scenery files for TerraSynch..?.) GitHub isn't the panacea that some make it out to be.
User avatar
LesterBoffo
 
Posts: 2129
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Callsign: LesBof
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: Win10 Pro

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby wkitty42 » Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:12 pm

LesterBoffo wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:58 pm:( guess where FG keeps it's scenery files for TerraSynch..?.)

apparently hosting on googlecode was a temporary setup... seems they knew that googlecode was going to go away back when they started hosting the scenery there... there's already been plans made and code being worked on to move the scenery elsewhere so that it will be available when the time comes... those of us running fg 3.5.0 might run into some problems like were seen with the FGDATA/FGADDON split and the move to other repo hosting services but it wasn't anything really major to overcome...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 6603
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:21 pm

LesterBoffo wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:58 pm: Still, it's a major PITA compared to what was working prior to the change. Do you want me to post *print-screens of the lack of 'download' buttons for the .xml's, .nas, etc.... and such, side by side with the list of files I was happily accessing with a 'download' button from a week and a half ago?


Definitely. I will contact github again with those screenshots and see what it is

Going on the comments from GoogleCode Blogspot's reactions to GoogleCode closing in January, 2016, ( guess where FG keeps it's scenery files for TerraSynch..?.) GitHub isn't the panacea that some make it out to be.

?
Ive seen the terrasync hosting problems.
Indeed scenery does not fit in free accounts of github. They have hard limits on file size of 50MB and recommended repository sizes at 1GB. I believe the terrasync scenery is more in the order of terabytes of data.

I don't know where negotiation stands on this, but I believe the core developers are trying to get sourceforge to host the terrasync subversion repos. If that happens, that will be amazing. Still is quite large repo, and it is accessed in a continuous manner.

Panacea is a bit of high language to describe github. I would say they offer a very convenient, user friendly, and amiable git hosting service. Prob. one of the best around --but that is a subjective opinion. FGDATA itself, both the official and the submodules one is hosted in sourceforge instead, just to respect the 1GB limit impossed. Other alternative is Gitlab, which started recently, and I believe the limit is 5GB.

So, like most in life, is a free market, where options pop. Being a panacea is quite a complicated attempt. But free market everyonce in a while drives a good handful of options for the customer to choose from, and it is in my opinion much preferred over monopolys.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby LesterBoffo » Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:25 pm

wkitty42 wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:12 pm:
LesterBoffo wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:58 pm:( guess where FG keeps it's scenery files for TerraSynch..?.)

apparently hosting on googlecode was a temporary setup... seems they knew that googlecode was going to go away back when they started hosting the scenery there... there's already been plans made and code being worked on to move the scenery elsewhere so that it will be available when the time comes... those of us running fg 3.5.0 might run into some problems like were seen with the FGDATA/FGADDON split and the move to other repo hosting services but it wasn't anything really major to overcome...


When and where did you get that? I've been using FG since 2011 and Terrasynch has always been from Google's SVN.

Explain to me how this is a 'temporary setup'?

'Seems'?
User avatar
LesterBoffo
 
Posts: 2129
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Callsign: LesBof
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: Win10 Pro

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:58 pm

LesterBoffo wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:58 pm:
Going on the comments from GoogleCode Blogspot's reactions to GoogleCode closing in January, 2016, ( guess where FG keeps it's scenery files for TerraSynch..?.) GitHub isn't the panacea that some make it out to be.


Now on a second thought.

In fact, one could get all the terrasync scenery to be not 1 but a collection of github repositories!

Very much like the aircrafts are.

It may need a little bit of re-engineering on how the terrain is fetched by terrasync, but maybe not even so! :D
Basically, terrasync fetches with SVN protocol, which github also speaks ....

How Does it work?

Given that the whole earth is such a big package, individual repositories would be created based upon the "1x1 degree tiles"
(those seen here): http://www.flightgear.org/legacy-Downlo ... v2.12.html

There are 526 tiles, therefore there would exist a total of 526 repos. All of which are less than 1GB size!
[here you can see the compressed size: ftp://ftp.kingmont.com/flightsims/fligh ... ery-v2.12/, but the repos will hold uncompressed data instead of tgz's ---NOTE: These are not the Terrasync's tiles]

These repos could be also compiled within a super repo "Scenery" that would allow fetching tiles with the submodules alternative, just as FGDATA next with submodules does with aircraft. Maybe-not

Terrasync can still use the SVN protocol to fetch parts of the tile correspoding to the required scenery, just as it does right now :D

Additional advantages

Users can submit modifications to the scenery readily.
Problems with tiles stiching still exits, but as an example XMLs that configure parkpos, tower viewpoints etc, or basically every text file in the Airports/* directories, can be rapidly updated by single commits. Therefore, proposing and updating these configurations will not required ages, or waiting for god to pull a finger, just instead some pull request by regular men!
:D

That will be rather awesome too.
Besides having direct git access to the scenery, to rapidly download a tile before launching the game and maybe prevent the terrasync downloading feature.

It's something to actually think about.

Best,
IHCOL
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby wkitty42 » Thu Mar 26, 2015 7:11 pm

LesterBoffo wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:25 pm:
wkitty42 wrote in Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:12 pm:apparently hosting on googlecode was a temporary setup... seems they knew that googlecode was going to go away back when they started hosting the scenery there... there's already been plans made and code being worked on to move the scenery elsewhere so that it will be available when the time comes... those of us running fg 3.5.0 might run into some problems like were seen with the FGDATA/FGADDON split and the move to other repo hosting services but it wasn't anything really major to overcome...


When and where did you get that? I've been using FG since 2011 and Terrasynch has always been from Google's SVN.

Explain to me how this is a 'temporary setup'?

'Seems'?

where did i get that information? from a message posted in these forums one or two before i read the post i replied to... i always do a new messages scan and start at the bottom reading each and every topic from oldest to newest... that way i don't miss anything... i'll try to find the link to the post... perhaps i misread it? i don't think i did... but anyway...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 6603
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby wkitty42 » Thu Mar 26, 2015 7:16 pm

this post by psadro_gm in the "Sharing airport layouts" topic in the Scenery sub-forum... point #3: hosting
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 6603
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:38 pm

As scheduled....

FGDATA next with submodules now follows the SVN FGADDon repository updates until revision 485
So far the script seems to be doing a fine job, and soon may be able to be cron-ed in :D

New work on the CItation II by Chris blues, and some new work on the Fokker Dr. 1 with new liveries can be used
Image
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:42 pm

New Submodules added

Hi All

For those following the FGDATA next with submodules:
Now you can get two additional Aircrafts/Submodules

1. The fictional Jet: Morgan
This Fictional Jet was created long time ago by a Flightgear enthusiast, and may be more than a lot of nerve to attempt to fly. But you ve got it!
http://horizonflightgearhangar.yolasite ... rcraft.php
Image

2. The recent Beechraft C18S by Helijah now has a JSBsim version by the JWOCKY Hangar
(TwinBeech)

Enjoy!
:D

Code: Select all
Aircraft/Morgan
Aircraft/TwinBeech-Jsb
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:50 pm

BRANCHES! :: Pronounced as in french

Image

The FGMEMBERs is proud to present the amazingly beautiful work by the french teams of Flightgear: La PAF and Patten


These french group of aircraft developers had made polished and amazing versions of several General Aviation aircraft that have risen to the status of secret fligthgear Jewels.

No additional new aircraft is presented. But their work can be seen as "branches" of the official "master" work on each of these aircraft.

There are several ways to obtain branches with git, or through the github platform. Also you can use your fgdata Next with submodules to checkout branches.

Leave a note if in doubt! :D

Some of these aircraft with "french" branches include:

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/Douglas-Dc3/tree/PAF2
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/Douglas-Dc3/tree/patten
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/dhc6/tree/patten
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/DR400-dauphin/tree/PAF
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/DR400-dauphin/tree/patten
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/Alouette-II/tree/patten
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/Aerostar-700/tree/PAF

and a few others
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby Hooray » Sat Mar 28, 2015 2:42 am

given how this has been evolving over the last few weeks, I am also increasingly coming to the conclusion that this effort is dividing the FlightGear community, so depending on your long-term goals here, you may want to reconsider how you approach the whole idea and it should be implemented.
Just imagine for a second that you may be unable/unwilling to maintain this 6-18 months down the line, and what this would probably cause among fellow contributors who jumped on this bandwagon - keep in mind that this is not about diversity in terms of features, but key-infrastructure like Thorsten explained earlier.

To be quite honest, I consider myself pretty familiar with the FlightGear project, including its infrastructure - but I am having a hard time foreseeing how this will end given the current modus operandi, and especially how this will not harm the project. Keep in mind that the majority of people interested in this, are not as likely to be similarly familiar with the FlightGear project (git, gitorious, building from source, cmake etc) and that it seems that you are providing a relatively popular alternative for the less tech-savvy folks, without taking into account that all your followers are increasingly being put into a position where there's a "single point of failure" - namely, you yourself, which is in stark contrast to how most/all of the other repositories are maintained.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11925
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:42 pm

Dear Hooray

Thanks for your critical comments. And I apologize it has taken me a few longer than usual to reply. I wanted to think a bit onto it first, and I was having time with my wife yesterday night. watching movies, and stuff.

I had also seen the evolution not only of this thread but of this topic. I dissent a bit on the "community division", and consider that there is more of a community integration around the issue. If you mean that the core developers have so far rejected the idea, that is true, and in my humble opinion an unfortunate situation. But they hold the ace.

As a matter of fact, this, as we had pointed, is not a "competition", or a two-camp battle of aircraft development. Any contributor, in my opinion is capable to actually develop simultaneously in SVN and FGMEMBERs if he wishes to do so, and if he finds advantages to. As an example experimental features are better implemented in FGMEMBERs via forking and branching, that could be practically done in SVN. If the SVN administrators would find this unacceptable, that is something I am unheard of, but also it will be a very strict posture that I am certain they won't be taking.

Contributors could develop in FGMEMBERS and transfer for official inclusion in an step-wise or released manner, again, if they wish to so as well. Or contributors can develop in SVN and wait for a few days for their contributions to be rebased onto the FGMEMBERs are as well. At the end of the day, it becomes a matter of taste and preference.

The long term goal is to create the "catalog" that allows FGMEMBERs integration with the newest QT5 launcher, with the download aircraft feature that is being currently developed. So FGMEMBERs versioned aircraft becomes available to the community as a whole (end users as well as developers), and not only as a end-of-the-road development system. Noticeably all of our aircrafts, branches and releases, are available to download as zip files as well, so althought they are neatly integrated with the FGDATA next with submodules, they are also available to end users, for testing, enjoyement etc.

Also, the "issues" area can be commented by anyone with a github account. So even users without FGMEMBERs write access, that are just testing aircraft, can leave bug comments, and issues to be addressed on any of our aircraft for consideration. We are indeed also trying to breach the distance between the users and the developers, and try to join a coordinated community, with an open-shared development infrastructure. Really- a great method to fly free.

Also, our development is separated by Teams, that allow organized access to aircraft sets to development groups. Our current teams include: PAF, FGUK, Prestes, C172pdetailed, USATourDevelopment, LakeOfConstance and Helijah. I would be happy to consider an area for Omega as well, but most of the aircraft we host from his hangar are unmaintained series: most of his current development is Creative Commons, and thus, not currently included in FGMEMBERS.

Most of these teams have at least 1 assignee, but some of them will be very happy to have a member jump on board and take care of these (specifically Prestes, and PAF).

I would be needing a bit more clarification on your part of what is the modus operandi that you have trouble with. That part I can't yet understand, but I will be happy to address the concern if it is made clearer to me.

You had mentioned before that you are very comfortable with Source Code Management systems. So that should address your last concern.
All of the FGMEMBER areas is a collection of git repositories.
As such, every clone made of these are complete repositories. And can be developed and maintained independently of my involvement. And every clone can be used to re-constitute or reconstruct an FGMEMBERs like area in case that I were to give up on maintaining.

Think of my work as a seminal work in the area. But not as a work that is completely dependent on me to be maintained, created or so. I had just shown the path. It is up to the community to embrace it and follow it, regardless of my presence.

In this direction, JWOCKY had also previously address some of this concerns. Any FGMEMBER currently on FGAircraftDevelopment Team has write access to the whole area, and as such, have the same priviledge as I do to maintain repos, or manage merge or pull requests made by anyone else. My only involvement here is to show and illustrate others how the task is done (which as a matter of fact is the simpler push of a green button when a contribution can be accepted, or a red button when it can't). As soon as other members on board get the "deal" my involvement is progressively less central.

Also, I had invited all of the managers of the SVN series (to be mentioned, Curtis Olson, James Turner, and Torsten Dreyer) to join the boat. They would get "Administrative Access" to the area as soon as they are willing. Reducing this way the feeling that the boat is under my sole control. That has not been my goal at any stage of establishing FGMEMBERs. Oppositely, the long term goal has been create an infrastructure where aircraft development can be shared, done in groups and as a community effort. Where anyone can cast a commit, and be respected as an author of their contribution, instead of requiring someone else to author for them, and an area that from its inception makes really difficult to outcast opinions, and oppositely encourages branching of all GPL aircraft and encourages proposing development directions.

It is an invitation. Not a threat.
And I would never given the steps I had taken if I think differently. Or If I would for a second, think that Flightgear, project and community will be threatend or limited.

Sincerely
IHCOL
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:56 pm

@hooray

Also, in a parallel topic, I will be happy to create some Wiki articles.
But so far, I may need some time to realize how is done.

Till date, I've just edited articles. Never created one from scratch.
But, given your interest in this topic, I may dare to ask you if you are willing to jump on board and help me getting hotstarted?

Best,
IHCOL
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd Party Repositories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest